A Review of Multicriteria Assessment Techniques Applied to Sustainable Infrastructure Design

[EN] Given the great impacts associated with the construction and maintenance of infrastructures in both the environmental, the economic and the social dimensions, a sustainable approach to their design appears essential to ease the fulfilment of the Sustainable Development Goals set by the United Nations. Multicriteria decision-making methods are usually applied to address the complex and often conflicting criteria that characterise sustainability. The present study aims to review the current state of the art regarding the application of such techniques in the sustainability assessment of infrastructures, analysing as well the sustainability impacts and criteria included in the assessments. The Analytic Hierarchy Process is the most frequently used weighting technique. Simple Additive Weighting has turned out to be the most applied decision-making method to assess the weighted criteria. Although a life cycle assessment approach is recurrently used to evaluate sustainability, standardised concepts, such as cost discounting, or presentation of the assumed functional unit or system boundaries, as required by ISO 14040, are still only marginally used. Additionally, a need for further research in the inclusion of fuzziness in the handling of linguistic variables is identified.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, along with FEDER funding (Project no. BIA2017-85098-R).Navarro, IJ.; Yepes, V.; Martí, JV. (2019). A Review of Multicriteria Assessment Techniques Applied to Sustainable Infrastructure Design. Advances in Civil Engineering. 2019(6134803):1-16. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6134803S11620196134803Kyriacou, A. P., Muinelo-Gallo, L., & Roca-Sagalés, O. (2019). The efficiency of transport infrastructure investment and the role of government quality: An empirical analysis. Transport Policy, 74, 93-102. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.11.017García-Segura, T., Yepes, V., Martí, J. V., & Alcalá, J. (2014). Optimization of concrete I-beams using a new hybrid glowworm swarm algorithm. Latin American Journal of Solids and Structures, 11(7), 1190-1205. doi:10.1590/s1679-78252014000700007Yepes, V., Martí, J. V., García-Segura, T., & González-Vidosa, F. (2017). Heuristics in optimal detailed design of precast road bridges. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 17(4), 738-749. doi:10.1016/j.acme.2017.02.006Frangopol, D. M. (2011). Life-cycle performance, management, and optimisation of structural systems under uncertainty: accomplishments and challenges1. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 7(6), 389-413. doi:10.1080/15732471003594427Safi, M., Sundquist, H., & Karoumi, R. (2015). Cost-Efficient Procurement of Bridge Infrastructures by Incorporating Life-Cycle Cost Analysis with Bridge Management Systems. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 20(6), 04014083. doi:10.1061/(asce)be.1943-5592.0000673Navarro, I. J., Yepes, V., Martí, J. V., & González-Vidosa, F. (2018). Life cycle impact assessment of corrosion preventive designs applied to prestressed concrete bridge decks. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196, 698-713. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.110Zhang, Y.-R., Wu, W.-J., & Wang, Y.-F. (2016). Bridge life cycle assessment with data uncertainty. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 21(4), 569-576. doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1035-7García-Segura, T., Penadés-Plà, V., & Yepes, V. (2018). Sustainable bridge design by metamodel-assisted multi-objective optimization and decision-making under uncertainty. Journal of Cleaner Production, 202, 904-915. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.177Van den Heede, P., & De Belie, N. (2014). A service life based global warming potential for high-volume fly ash concrete exposed to carbonation. Construction and Building Materials, 55, 183-193. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.01.033Braga, A. M., Silvestre, J. D., & de Brito, J. (2017). Compared environmental and economic impact from cradle to gate of concrete with natural and recycled coarse aggregates. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 529-543. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.057Hossain, M. U., Poon, C. S., Dong, Y. H., Lo, I. M. C., & Cheng, J. C. P. (2017). Development of social sustainability assessment method and a comparative case study on assessing recycled construction materials. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 23(8), 1654-1674. doi:10.1007/s11367-017-1373-0Dong, Y. H., & Ng, S. T. (2015). A social life cycle assessment model for building construction in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 20(8), 1166-1180. doi:10.1007/s11367-015-0908-5Sierra, L. A., Yepes, V., García-Segura, T., & Pellicer, E. (2018). Bayesian network method for decision-making about the social sustainability of infrastructure projects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 176, 521-534. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.140Montalbán-Domingo, L., García-Segura, T., Sanz, M. A., & Pellicer, E. (2018). Social sustainability criteria in public-work procurement: An international perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 198, 1355-1371. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.083Zamarrón-Mieza, I., Yepes, V., & Moreno-Jiménez, J. M. (2017). A systematic review of application of multi-criteria decision analysis for aging-dam management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 147, 217-230. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.092Sierra, L. A., Yepes, V., & Pellicer, E. (2018). A review of multi-criteria assessment of the social sustainability of infrastructures. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 496-513. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.022Reza, B., Sadiq, R., & Hewage, K. (2011). Sustainability assessment of flooring systems in the city of Tehran: An AHP-based life cycle analysis. Construction and Building Materials, 25(4), 2053-2066. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.11.041Pons, O., & de la Fuente, A. (2013). Integrated sustainability assessment method applied to structural concrete columns. Construction and Building Materials, 49, 882-893. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.09.009Mosalam, K. M., Alibrandi, U., Lee, H., & Armengou, J. (2018). Performance-based engineering and multi-criteria decision analysis for sustainable and resilient building design. Structural Safety, 74, 1-13. doi:10.1016/j.strusafe.2018.03.005Perini, K., & Rosasco, P. (2013). Cost–benefit analysis for green façades and living wall systems. Building and Environment, 70, 110-121. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.08.012Gilani, G., Blanco, A., & Fuente, A. de la. (2017). A New Sustainability Assessment Approach Based on Stakeholder’s Satisfaction for Building Façades. Energy Procedia, 115, 50-58. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.05.006Moussavi Nadoushani, Z. S., Akbarnezhad, A., Ferre Jornet, J., & Xiao, J. (2017). Multi-criteria selection of façade systems based on sustainability criteria. Building and Environment, 121, 67-78. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.05.016Guzmán-Sánchez, S., Jato-Espino, D., Lombillo, I., & Diaz-Sarachaga, J. M. (2018). Assessment of the contributions of different flat roof types to achieving sustainable development. Building and Environment, 141, 182-192. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.05.063Hashemkhani Zolfani, S., Pourhossein, M., Yazdani, M., & Kazimieras Zavadskas, E. (2018). Evaluating construction projects of hotels based on environmental sustainability with MCDM framework. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 57(1), 357-365. doi:10.1016/j.aej.2016.11.002Invidiata, A., Lavagna, M., & Ghisi, E. (2018). Selecting design strategies using multi-criteria decision making to improve the sustainability of buildings. Building and Environment, 139, 58-68. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.04.041Kamali, M., Hewage, K., & Milani, A. S. (2018). Life cycle sustainability performance assessment framework for residential modular buildings: Aggregated sustainability indices. Building and Environment, 138, 21-41. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.04.019Pons, O., & Aguado, A. (2012). Integrated value model for sustainable assessment applied to technologies used to build schools in Catalonia, Spain. Building and Environment, 53, 49-58. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.01.007Akadiri, P. O., Olomolaiye, P. O., & Chinyio, E. A. (2013). Multi-criteria evaluation model for the selection of sustainable materials for building projects. Automation in Construction, 30, 113-125. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2012.10.004Motuzienė, V., Rogoža, A., Lapinskienė, V., & Vilutienė, T. (2016). Construction solutions for energy efficient single-family house based on its life cycle multi-criteria analysis: a case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 532-541. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.103Samani, P., Mendes, A., Leal, V., Miranda Guedes, J., & Correia, N. (2015). A sustainability assessment of advanced materials for novel housing solutions. Building and Environment, 92, 182-191. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.04.012AL-Nassar, F., Ruparathna, R., Chhipi-Shrestha, G., Haider, H., Hewage, K., & Sadiq, R. (2016). Sustainability assessment framework for low rise commercial buildings: life cycle impact index-based approach. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 18(8), 2579-2590. doi:10.1007/s10098-016-1168-1ALwaer, H., & Clements-Croome, D. J. (2010). Key performance indicators (KPIs) and priority setting in using the multi-attribute approach for assessing sustainable intelligent buildings. Building and Environment, 45(4), 799-807. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.08.019Yu, J. Q., Dang, B., Clements-Croome, D., & Xu, S. (2011). Sustainability Assessment Indicators and Methodology for Intelligent Buildings. Advanced Materials Research, 368-373, 3829-3832. doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/amr.368-373.3829Drejeris, R., & Kavolynas, A. (2014). Multi-criteria Evaluation of Building Sustainability Behavior. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 502-511. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.894IGNATIUS, J., RAHMAN, A., YAZDANI, M., ŠAPARAUSKAS, J., & HARON, S. H. (2016). AN INTEGRATED FUZZY ANP–QFD APPROACH FOR GREEN BUILDING ASSESSMENT. JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 22(4), 551-563. doi:10.3846/13923730.2015.1120772Amoozad Mahdiraji, H., Arzaghi, S., Stauskis, G., & Zavadskas, E. (2018). A Hybrid Fuzzy BWM-COPRAS Method for Analyzing Key Factors of Sustainable Architecture. Sustainability, 10(5), 1626. doi:10.3390/su10051626San-José Lombera, J.-T., & Garrucho Aprea, I. (2010). A system approach to the environmental analysis of industrial buildings. Building and Environment, 45(3), 673-683. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.08.012Cuadrado, J., Zubizarreta, M., Rojí, E., García, H., & Larrauri, M. (2015). Sustainability-Related Decision Making in Industrial Buildings: An AHP Analysis. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2015, 1-13. doi:10.1155/2015/157129Cuadrado, J., Zubizarreta, M., Rojí, E., Larrauri, M., & Álvarez, I. (2016). Sustainability assessment methodology for industrial buildings: three case studies. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems, 33(2), 106-124. doi:10.1080/10286608.2016.1148143Heravi, G., Fathi, M., & Faeghi, S. (2017). Multi-criteria group decision-making method for optimal selection of sustainable industrial building options focused on petrochemical projects. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2999-3013. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.168Formisano, A., & Mazzolani, F. M. (2015). On the selection by MCDM methods of the optimal system for seismic retrofitting and vertical addition of existing buildings. Computers & Structures, 159, 1-13. doi:10.1016/j.compstruc.2015.06.016Terracciano, G., Di Lorenzo, G., Formisano, A., & Landolfo, R. (2014). Cold-formed thin-walled steel structures as vertical addition and energetic retrofitting systems of existing masonry buildings. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering, 19(7), 850-866. doi:10.1080/19648189.2014.974832Zavadskas, E. K., & Antucheviciene, J. (2007). Multiple criteria evaluation of rural building’s regeneration alternatives. Building and Environment, 42(1), 436-451. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.08.001Hosseini, S. M. A., de la Fuente, A., & Pons, O. (2016). Multicriteria Decision-Making Method for Sustainable Site Location of Post-Disaster Temporary Housing in Urban Areas. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(9), 04016036. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001137Malekly, H., Meysam Mousavi, S., & Hashemi, H. (2010). A fuzzy integrated methodology for evaluating conceptual bridge design. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(7), 4910-4920. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.12.024Gervásio, H., & Simões da Silva, L. (2012). A probabilistic decision-making approach for the sustainable assessment of infrastructures. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(8), 7121-7131. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.01.032Balali, V., Mottaghi, A., Shoghli, O., & Golabchi, M. (2014). Selection of Appropriate Material, Construction Technique, and Structural System of Bridges by Use of Multicriteria Decision-Making Method. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2431(1), 79-87. doi:10.3141/2431-11Jakiel, P., & Fabianowski, D. (2015). FAHP model used for assessment of highway RC bridge structural and technological arrangements. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(8), 4054-4061. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2014.12.039Yepes, V., García-Segura, T., & Moreno-Jiménez, J. M. (2015). A cognitive approach for the multi-objective optimization of RC structural problems. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 15(4), 1024-1036. doi:10.1016/j.acme.2015.05.001Kripka, M., Yepes, V., & Milani, C. (2019). Selection of Sustainable Short-Span Bridge Design in Brazil. Sustainability, 11(5), 1307. doi:10.3390/su11051307Wang, Y.-M., Liu, J., & Elhag, T. M. S. (2008). An integrated AHP–DEA methodology for bridge risk assessment. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54(3), 513-525. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2007.09.002Abu Dabous, S., & Alkass, S. (2008). Decision support method for multi‐criteria selection of bridge rehabilitation strategy. Construction Management and Economics, 26(8), 883-893. doi:10.1080/01446190802071190Chen, T.-Y. (2014). The extended linear assignment method for multiple criteria decision analysis based on interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38(7-8), 2101-2117. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2013.10.017Begić, F., & Afgan, N. H. (2007). Sustainability assessment tool for the decision making in selection of energy system—Bosnian case. Energy, 32(10), 1979-1985. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2007.02.006Cartelle Barros, J. J., Lara Coira, M., de la Cruz López, M. P., & del Caño Gochi, A. (2015). Assessing the global sustainability of different electricity generation systems. Energy, 89, 473-489. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2015.05.110Klein, S. J. W., & Whalley, S. (2015). Comparing the sustainability of U.S. electricity options through multi-criteria decision analysis. Energy Policy, 79, 127-149. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2015.01.007Montajabiha, M. (2015). An Extended PROMETHE II Multi-Criteria Group Decision Making Technique Based on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Logic for Sustainable Energy Planning. Group Decision and Negotiation, 25(2), 221-244. doi:10.1007/s10726-015-9440-zFetanat, A., & Khorasaninejad, E. (2015). A novel hybrid MCDM approach for offshore wind farm site selection: A case study of Iran. Ocean & Coastal Management, 109, 17-28. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.02.005Medina-González, S., Espuña, A., & Puigjaner, L. (2018). An efficient uncertainty representation for the design of sustainable energy generation systems. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 131, 144-159. doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2017.11.044Gumus, S., Kucukvar, M., & Tatari, O. (2016). Intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria decision making framework based on life cycle environmental, economic and social impacts: The case of U.S. wind energy. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 8, 78-92. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2016.06.006FUENTE, A. de la, ARMENGOU, J., PONS, O., & AGUADO, A. (2016). Multi-criteria decision-making model for assessing the sustainability index of wind-turbine support systems: application to a new precast concrete alternative. JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 23(2), 194-203. doi:10.3846/13923730.2015.1023347Afshar, A., Mariño, M. A., Saadatpour, M., & Afshar, A. (2010). Fuzzy TOPSIS Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Applied to Karun Reservoirs System. Water Resources Management, 25(2), 545-563. doi:10.1007/s11269-010-9713-xSun, X., Ning, P., Tang, X., Yi, H., Li, K., Zhou, L., & Xu, X. (2013). Environmental Risk Assessment System for Phosphogypsum Tailing Dams. The Scientific World Journal, 2013, 1-13. doi:10.1155/2013/680798Martin, C., Ruperd, Y., & Legret, M. (2007). Urban stormwater drainage management: The development of a multicriteria decision aid approach for best management practices. European Journal of Operational Research, 181(1), 338-349. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.06.019Dong, X., Zeng, S., Chen, J., & Zhao, D. (2008). An integrated assessment method of urban drainage system: A case study in Shenzhen City, China. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering in China, 2(2), 150-156. doi:10.1007/s11783-008-0014-zTahmasebi Birgani, Y., & Yazdandoost, F. (2018). An Integrated Framework to Evaluate Resilient-Sustainable Urban Drainage Management Plans Using a Combined-adaptive MCDM Technique. Water Resources Management, 32(8), 2817-2835. doi:10.1007/s11269-018-1960-2De la Fuente, A., Pons, O., Josa, A., & Aguado, A. (2016). Multi-Criteria Decision Making in the sustainability assessment of sewerage pipe systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112, 4762-4770. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.002Onu, U. P., Xie, Q., & Xu, L. (2017). A Fuzzy TOPSIS model Framework for Ranking Sustainable Water Supply Alternatives. Water Resources Management, 31(9), 2579-2593. doi:10.1007/s11269-017-1636-3Chhipi-Shrestha, G., Hewage, K., & Sadiq, R. (2017). Selecting Sustainability Indicators for Small to Medium Sized Urban Water Systems Using Fuzzy-ELECTRE. Water Environment Research, 89(3), 238-249. doi:10.2175/106143016x14798353399494Kucukvar, M., Gumus, S., Egilmez, G., & Tatari, O. (2014). Ranking the sustainability performance of pavements: An intuitionistic fuzzy decision making method. Automation in Construction, 40, 33-43. doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2013.12.009Jato-Espino, D., Rodriguez-Hernandez, J., Andrés-Valeri, V. C., & Ballester-Muñoz, F. (2014). A fuzzy stochastic multi-criteria model for the selection of urban pervious pavements. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(15), 6807-6817. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2014.05.008Torres-Machí, C., Chamorro, A., Pellicer, E., Yepes, V., & Videla, C. (2015). Sustainable Pavement Management. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2523(1), 56-63. doi:10.3141/2523-07Santos, J., Bressi, S., Cerezo, V., & Lo Presti, D. (2019). SUP&R DSS: A sustainability-based decision support system for road pavements. Journal of Cleaner Production, 206, 524-540. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.308Oses, U., Rojí, E., Cuadrado, J., & Larrauri, M. (2018). Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Tool for Local Governments to Evaluate the Global and Local Sustainability of Transportation Systems in Urban Areas: Case Study. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 144(1), 04017019. doi:10.1061/(asce)up.1943-5444.0000406Asgari, N., Hassani, A., Jones, D., & Nguye, H. H. (2015). Sustainability ranking of the UK major ports: Methodology and case study. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 78, 19-39. doi:10.1016/j.tre.2015.01.014Banias, G., Achillas, C., Vlachokostas, C., Moussiopoulos, N., & Tarsenis, S. (2010). Assessing multiple criteria for the optimal location of a construction and demolition waste management facility. Building and Environment, 45(10), 2317-2326. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.04.016Rochikashvili, M., & Bongaerts, J. C. (2016). Multi-criteria Decision-making for Sustainable Wall Paints and Coatings Using Analytic Hierarchy Process. Energy Procedia, 96, 923-933. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.167Ugwu, O. O., & Haupt, T. C. (2007). Key performance indicators and assessment methods for infrastructure sustainability—a South African construction industry perspective. Building and Environment, 42(2), 665-680. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.10.018Reyes, J. P., San-José, J. T., Cuadrado, J., & Sancibrian, R. (2014). Health & Safety criteria for determining the sustainable value of construction projects. Safety Science, 62, 221-232. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.023Dobrovolskienė, N., & Tamošiūnienė, R. (2015). An Index to Measure Sustainability of a Business Project in the Construction Industry: Lithuanian Case. Sustainability, 8(1), 14. doi:10.3390/su8010014Marzouk, M., & Azab, S. (2014). Environmental and economic impact assessment of construction and demolition waste disposal using system dynamics. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 82, 41-49. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2013.10.015Navarro, I. J., Yepes, V., & Martí, J. V. (2018). Social life cycle assessment of concrete bridge decks exposed to aggressive environments. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 72, 50-63. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2018.05.003Brans, J. P., & Vincke, P. (1985). Note—A Preference Ranking Organisation Method. Management Science, 31(6), 647-656. doi:10.1287/mnsc.31.6.647Kabir, G., Sadiq, R., & Tesfamariam, S. (2013). A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 10(9), 1176-1210. doi:10.1080/15732479.2013.795978Podvezko, V. (2011). The Comparative Analysis of MCDA Methods SAW and COPRAS. Engineering Economics, 22(2). doi:10.5755/j01.ee.22.2.310Kaya, İ., Çolak, M., & Terzi, F. (2018). Use of MCDM techniques for energy policy and decision-making problems: A review. International Journal of Energy Research, 42(7), 2344-2372. doi:10.1002/er.4016Mardani, A., Jusoh, A., MD Nor, K., Khalifah, Z., Zakwan, N., & Valipo

Multi-criteria decision techniques in civil engineering education. Comparative study applied to the sustainability of structures

[EN] Traditionally, technical degrees have focused on promoting the functionality and durability of designs, orienting the capacities of their students towards the optimization of economic aspects. The challenges that have recently emerged regarding the future of the construction sector and new cities require a paradigm shift in the conventional teaching of civil engineering and architecture. New training trends have been detected in higher education programs through the introduction of new concepts, such as sustainable design. According to UNESCO, "Education for Sustainable Development promotes competencies like critical thinking, and making decisions in a collaborative way". In the postgraduate course "Models of prediction and optimization of concrete structures", taught in the Master of Concrete Engineering at the Polytechnic University of Valencia, students are instructed in research methodologies that allow the evaluation of sustainability through different multi-criteria decision techniques in the selection of the best structural typology considering economic, environmental and social aspects. In this paper, a comparative study is made and the application of the different tools taught in the course for the decision making with multiple criteria, namely SAW, COPRAS, TOPSIS, VIKOR, ELECTRE, MIVES as well as AHP for the weightings. The assess offers a transversal vision, with the characteristics, strengths and weaknesses of these multi-criteria techniques that are commonly used in the field of sustainability, applied in this case between three design alternatives for the structure of a single-family home.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, which was co-financed with FEDER funds (Project: BIA2017-85098-R)Yepes, V.; Sánchez-Garrido, AJ.; Navarro, IJ. (2021). Multi-criteria decision techniques in civil engineering education. Comparative study applied to the sustainability of structures. IATED Academy. 2564-2573. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2021.0547S2564257

Multi-criteria decision making applied to engineering education. Economic-environmental sustainability in the structure of single-family homes

[EN] This paper is based on the contents of the postgraduate course "Prediction and optimization models of concrete structures", taught in the Master of Concrete Engineering at the Polytechnic University of Valencia, in which civil engineering students are taught the various techniques of multi-criteria assessment, with a sustainable approach, applied to the optimal design of structures. This allows the student to compare complex aspects with generally contradictory objectives that characterize sustainability under criteria of economic, environmental and social efficiency, among others. Construction companies usually focus on cost optimization during the construction stage of structures that are currently not sufficient to meet the growing social demands of the 21st century world, needing to balance the criteria that support sustainability. The construction sector represents a relevant percentage of the total CO2 emissions, being responsible for a great part of the environmental impacts, which is enough reason for the European Union policies to be more and more oriented to the reduction of these emissions. This document presents a case study on a research being carried out by the faculty and students who are part of the research team, comparing two different construction alternatives, namely "traditional" in-situ concrete versus "prefabricated" with blocks and plates of Ytong. The aim is to find the structural optimum of an urban single-family house from the economic and environmental point of view throughout its life cycle. The objective is to find the structural optimum of an urban single-family house from the economic and environmental point of view throughout its life cycle. An analysis of indicators including the production phase, construction, the use and maintenance stage and the end of life has been carried out. The environmental impacts throughout the life cycle of the alternatives have been evaluated on the basis of the Ecoinvent 3.3 environmental database, using the ReCiPe impact assessment methodology. Finally, to evaluate the different alternatives, we have applied the multiple attribute method TOPSIS, based on distance to establish the order of preference by similarity with the ideal solution. Our findings show that the most economical solution in each phase is not the most environmentally efficient. For sustainability-based decision making that does not lead to erroneous results a balance must be sought between all dimensions, including not only monetary aspects in the structure design process.The authors acknowledge the support received from the Ministry of Economy and Business and the FEDER funding (Research Project BIA2017-85098-R).Sánchez-Garrido, AJ.; Navarro, IJ.; Yepes, V. (2020). Multi-criteria decision making applied to engineering education. Economic-environmental sustainability in the structure of single-family homes. IATED Academy. 2170-2180. https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2020.0521S2170218

Evaluating the sustainability of soil improvement techniques in foundation substructures

[EN] The soil is not always suitable or competent to support a direct shallow foundation in construction. In many cases, to avoid costly deep foundations, it is indicated to replace, improve, or reinforce such soil. This paper focuses on evaluating the contribution to sustainability between different soil improvement techniques and the outcome of their application to the foundation of a single-family house as an alternative to the one built. The life-cycle performance in sustainability is compared between the baseline design (without intervention), backfilling and soil compaction, soil-cement columns, rigid inclusion of micropiles, and nailing of precast joists. To characterize sustainability, a set of 37 indicators is proposed that integrate the economic or environmental aspects of each design alternative and its social impacts. A sustainability ranking is obtained for the different alternatives based on the ELECTRE IS method for multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). The sensitivity of the obtained results is evaluated against different MCDM methods (TOPSIS, COPRAS) and different criteria weights. The evaluation provides a cross-cutting view, comparing the ability and reliability of each technique to prioritize the ground consolidation solution that best contributes to the sustainability in the design of a building's substructure.Grant PID2020-117056RB-I00 funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by "ERDF A way of making Europe". The authors would also like to thank Jose Fernando Moreno Serrano (co-director of the company "Alto Almanzora Geological Consulting") for providing some of the data and geotechnical information needed for this study.Sánchez-Garrido, AJ.; Navarro, IJ.; Yepes, V. (2022). Evaluating the sustainability of soil improvement techniques in foundation substructures. Journal of Cleaner Production. 351:1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.13146312035

Engineering and architecture postgraduate student's perceptions on sustainable design

[EN] The construction sector is one of the principal contributors to the actual levels of environmental stress, but is also recognised as an essential sector to promote human well-being, access to education or poverty eradication through the development of infrastructures and services. Therefore, since the recent establishment of the Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, architects and civil engineers have emerged as key actors for the sustainable future to which we all aspire. However, the complexity of sustainability claim for fundamental changes in current university curricula to educate professionals who can meet such challenge. Conventional university courses in engineering and architecture fall usually short in providing a holistic education where the students adequately perceive the relevance of considering not only the functional requirements of their designs, but also their social and environmental consequences. The present communication aims to provide an assessment tool to detect the main gaps in the education of engineers and architects based on the post-graduate students¿ perceptions of sustainable design. A survey is conducted on the students from the postgraduate courses ¿Models of prediction and optimization of concrete structures¿ from the Master¿s degree in Concrete Engineering, and ¿Innovation Management in the Construction Sector¿ from the Master's Degree in Planning and Management in Civil Engineering, both taught at the Polytechnic University of Valencia. The consistency of the responses is evaluated objectively based on the Analytical Hierarchy Process method, thus bringing to light the educational fields where special efforts shall be put when adapting university curricula towards the education on sustainability.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, which was co-financed with FEDER funds (Project: BIA2017-85098-R).Navarro, IJ.; Sánchez-Garrido, AJ.; Yepes, V. (2021). Engineering and architecture postgraduate student's perceptions on sustainable design. IATED Academy. 2554-2563. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2021.0545S2554256

Disk Galaxy Formation in a LambdaCDM Universe

We describe hydrodynamical simulations of galaxy formation in a Lambda cold dark matter (CDM) cosmology performed using a subresolution model for star formation and feedback in a multiphase interstellar medium (ISM). In particular, we demonstrate the formation of a well-resolved disk galaxy. The surface brightness profile of the galaxy is exponential, with a B-band central surface brightness of 21.0 mag arcsec^-2 and a scale-length of R_d = 2.0 h^-1 kpc. We find no evidence for a significant bulge component. The simulated galaxy falls within the I-band Tully-Fisher relation, with an absolute magnitude of I = -21.2 and a peak stellar rotation velocity of V_rot=121.3 km s^-1. While the total specific angular momentum of the stars in the galaxy agrees with observations, the angular momentum in the inner regions appears to be low by a factor of ~2. The star formation rate of the galaxy peaks at ~7 M_sun yr^-1 between redshifts z=2-4, with the mean stellar age decreasing from \~10 Gyrs in the outer regions of the disk to ~7.5 Gyrs in the center, indicating that the disk did not simply form inside-out. The stars exhibit a metallicity gradient from 0.7 Z_sun at the edge of the disk to 1.3 Z_sun in the center. Using a suite of idealized galaxy formation simulations with different models for the ISM, we show that the effective pressure support provided by star formation and feedback in our multiphase model is instrumental in allowing the formation of large, stable disk galaxies. If ISM gas is instead modeled with an isothermal equation of state, or if star formation is suppressed entirely, growing gaseous disks quickly violate the Toomre stability criterion and undergo catastrophic fragmentation.Comment: 14 pages, 12 figures, LaTex (emulateapj.cls), submitted to ApJ, high resolution images available at http://www-cfa.harvard.edu/~brobertson/papers/galaxy

Group analytic network process for the sustainability assessment of bridges near shore

[EN] Since the Paris Agreement was established, great interest has arisen in evaluating the sustainability performance of our structures along with their life cycles. The remarkable economic expenses, the important environmental impacts associated with the construction sector, and the great social benefits that might be derived from a well-designed infrastructure system have put the design of essential infrastructures in the spotlight of many researchers. One of today¿s main challenges is the derivation of adequate sustainability indicators that aid designers when deciding on the most sustainable design alternative. The sustainability performance of infrastructures is based on various indicators that are often conflicting given their different nature. Consequently, the obtention of such indicators usually needs to be addressed using multi-criteria decision-making methods. The present communication shows the analytic hierarchy process (ANP) for the sustainability assessment of a concrete bridge exposed to a coastal environment, involving several decision-makers. A set of nine quantitative criteria, covering the economic, environmental, and social dimensions of sustainability, has been considered here.Grant PID2020-117056RB-I00 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and by ERDF A way of making Europe.Navarro, IJ.; Martí Albiñana, JV.; Yepes, V. (2022). Group analytic network process for the sustainability assessment of bridges near shore. WIT Transactions on the Built Environment (Online). 209:143-154. https://doi.org/10.2495/HPSU22013114315420

Neutrosophic Completion Technique for Incomplete Higher-Order AHP Comparison Matrices

[EN] After the recent establishment of the Sustainable Development Goals and the Agenda 2030, the sustainable design of products in general and infrastructures in particular emerge as a challenging field for the development and application of multicriteria decision-making tools. Sustainability-related decision problems usually involve, by definition, a wide variety in number and nature of conflicting criteria, thus pushing the limits of conventional multicriteria decision-making tools practices. The greater the number of criteria and the more complex the relations existing between them in a decisional problem, the less accurate and certain are the judgments required by usual methods, such as the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The present paper proposes a neutrosophic AHP completion methodology to reduce the number of judgments required to be emitted by the decision maker. This increases the consistency of their responses, while accounting for uncertainties associated to the fuzziness of human thinking. The method is applied to a sustainable-design problem, resulting in weight estimations that allow for a reduction of up to 22% of the conventionally required comparisons, with an average accuracy below 10% between estimates and the weights resulting from a conventionally completed AHP matrix, and a root mean standard error below 15%.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Business, along with FEDER funding (DIMALIFE Project: BIA2017-85098-R).Navarro, IJ.; Martí Albiñana, JV.; Yepes, V. (2021). Neutrosophic Completion Technique for Incomplete Higher-Order AHP Comparison Matrices. Mathematics. 9(5):1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/math905049611995Worrell, E., Price, L., Martin, N., Hendriks, C., & Meida, L. O. (2001). CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM THE GLOBAL CEMENT INDUSTRY. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 26(1), 303-329. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.26.1.303García, J., Yepes, V., & Martí, J. V. (2020). A Hybrid k-Means Cuckoo Search Algorithm Applied to the Counterfort Retaining Walls Problem. Mathematics, 8(4), 555. doi:10.3390/math8040555Penadés-Plà, V., García-Segura, T., & Yepes, V. (2020). Robust Design Optimization for Low-Cost Concrete Box-Girder Bridge. Mathematics, 8(3), 398. doi:10.3390/math8030398Kim, S., & Frangopol, D. M. (2017). Multi-objective probabilistic optimum monitoring planning considering fatigue damage detection, maintenance, reliability, service life and cost. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 57(1), 39-54. doi:10.1007/s00158-017-1849-3García-Segura, T., Yepes, V., & Frangopol, D. M. (2017). Multi-objective design of post-tensioned concrete road bridges using artificial neural networks. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 56(1), 139-150. doi:10.1007/s00158-017-1653-0Van den Heede, P., & De Belie, N. (2014). A service life based global warming potential for high-volume fly ash concrete exposed to carbonation. Construction and Building Materials, 55, 183-193. doi:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.01.033García, J., Martí, J. V., & Yepes, V. (2020). The Buttressed Walls Problem: An Application of a Hybrid Clustering Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm. Mathematics, 8(6), 862. doi:10.3390/math8060862García-Segura, T., Penadés-Plà, V., & Yepes, V. (2018). Sustainable bridge design by metamodel-assisted multi-objective optimization and decision-making under uncertainty. Journal of Cleaner Production, 202, 904-915. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.177Gursel, A. P., & Ostertag, C. (2016). Comparative life-cycle impact assessment of concrete manufacturing in Singapore. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 22(2), 237-255. doi:10.1007/s11367-016-1149-yPenadés-Plà, V., Martí, J. V., García-Segura, T., & Yepes, V. (2017). Life-Cycle Assessment: A Comparison between Two Optimal Post-Tensioned Concrete Box-Girder Road Bridges. Sustainability, 9(10), 1864. doi:10.3390/su9101864Navarro, I. J., Yepes, V., & Martí, J. V. (2018). Social life cycle assessment of concrete bridge decks exposed to aggressive environments. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 72, 50-63. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2018.05.003Sierra, L. A., Pellicer, E., & Yepes, V. (2017). Method for estimating the social sustainability of infrastructure projects. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 65, 41-53. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2017.02.004Navarro, I. J., Yepes, V., & Martí, J. V. (2019). Sustainability assessment of concrete bridge deck designs in coastal environments using neutrosophic criteria weights. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 16(7), 949-967. doi:10.1080/15732479.2019.1676791Tavana, M., Shaabani, A., Javier Santos-Arteaga, F., & Raeesi Vanani, I. (2020). A Review of Uncertain Decision-Making Methods in Energy Management Using Text Mining and Data Analytics. Energies, 13(15), 3947. doi:10.3390/en13153947Yannis, G., Kopsacheili, A., Dragomanovits, A., & Petraki, V. (2020). State-of-the-art review on multi-criteria decision-making in the transport sector. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), 7(4), 413-431. doi:10.1016/j.jtte.2020.05.005Navarro, I. J., Penadés-Plà, V., Martínez-Muñoz, D., Rempling, R., & Yepes, V. (2020). LIFE CYCLE SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT FOR MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING IN BRIDGE DESIGN: A REVIEW. JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 26(7), 690-704. doi:10.3846/jcem.2020.13599Hedelin, B. (2018). Complexity is no excuse. Sustainability Science, 14(3), 733-749. doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0635-5Zadeh, L. A. (1973). Outline of a New Approach to the Analysis of Complex Systems and Decision Processes. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-3(1), 28-44. doi:10.1109/tsmc.1973.5408575Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. doi:10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-xMilošević, D. M., Milošević, M. R., & Simjanović, D. J. (2020). Implementation of Adjusted Fuzzy AHP Method in the Assessment for Reuse of Industrial Buildings. Mathematics, 8(10), 1697. doi:10.3390/math8101697Lin, C.-N. (2020). A Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process-Based Analysis of the Dynamic Sustainable Management Index in Leisure Agriculture. Sustainability, 12(13), 5395. doi:10.3390/su12135395Salehi, S., Jalili Ghazizadeh, M., Tabesh, M., Valadi, S., & Salamati Nia, S. P. (2020). A risk component-based model to determine pipes renewal strategies in water distribution networks. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 17(10), 1338-1359. doi:10.1080/15732479.2020.1842466Liu, P., & Liu, X. (2016). The neutrosophic number generalized weighted power averaging operator and its application in multiple attribute group decision making. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 9(2), 347-358. doi:10.1007/s13042-016-0508-0Peng, J., Wang, J., & Yang, W.-E. (2016). A multi-valued neutrosophic qualitative flexible approach based on likelihood for multi-criteria decision-making problems. International Journal of Systems Science, 48(2), 425-435. doi:10.1080/00207721.2016.1218975Saaty, T. L., & Ozdemir, M. S. (2003). Why the magic number seven plus or minus two. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 38(3-4), 233-244. doi:10.1016/s0895-7177(03)90083-5Harker, P. T. (1987). Incomplete pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process. Mathematical Modelling, 9(11), 837-848. doi:10.1016/0270-0255(87)90503-3Chen, K., Kou, G., Michael Tarn, J., & Song, Y. (2015). Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices. Annals of Operations Research, 235(1), 155-175. doi:10.1007/s10479-015-1997-zBozóki, S., Fülöp, J., & Rónyai, L. (2010). On optimal completion of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 52(1-2), 318-333. doi:10.1016/j.mcm.2010.02.047Dong, M., Li, S., & Zhang, H. (2015). Approaches to group decision making with incomplete information based on power geometric operators and triangular fuzzy AHP. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(21), 7846-7857. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.06.007Zhou, X., Hu, Y., Deng, Y., Chan, F. T. S., & Ishizaka, A. (2018). A DEMATEL-based completion method for incomplete pairwise comparison matrix in AHP. Annals of Operations Research, 271(2), 1045-1066. doi:10.1007/s10479-018-2769-3Sumathi, I. R., & Antony Crispin Sweety, C. (2019). New approach on differential equation via trapezoidal neutrosophic number. Complex & Intelligent Systems, 5(4), 417-424. doi:10.1007/s40747-019-00117-3Deli, I., & Şubaş, Y. (2016). A ranking method of single valued neutrosophic numbers and its applications to multi-attribute decision making problems. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics, 8(4), 1309-1322. doi:10.1007/s13042-016-0505-3Ye, J. (2017). Subtraction and Division Operations of Simplified Neutrosophic Sets. Information, 8(2), 51. doi:10.3390/info8020051Liang, R., Wang, J., & Zhang, H. (2017). A multi-criteria decision-making method based on single-valued trapezoidal neutrosophic preference relations with complete weight information. Neural Computing and Applications, 30(11), 3383-3398. doi:10.1007/s00521-017-2925-8Sodenkamp, M. A., Tavana, M., & Di Caprio, D. (2018). An aggregation method for solving group multi-criteria decision-making problems with single-valued neutrosophic sets. Applied Soft Computing, 71, 715-727. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2018.07.020Sierra, L. A., Pellicer, E., & Yepes, V. (2016). Social Sustainability in the Lifecycle of Chilean Public Infrastructure. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 142(5), 05015020. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001099Abdel-Basset, M., Manogaran, G., Mohamed, M., & Chilamkurti, N. (2018). RETRACTED: Three-way decisions based on neutrosophic sets and AHP-QFD framework for supplier selection problem. Future Generation Computer Systems, 89, 19-30. doi:10.1016/j.future.2018.06.024Dubois, D. (2011). The role of fuzzy sets in decision sciences: Old techniques and new directions. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 184(1), 3-28. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2011.06.003Buckley, J. J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17(3), 233-247. doi:10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9Wang, Y.-M., & Elhag, T. M. S. (2006). On the normalization of interval and fuzzy weights. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 157(18), 2456-2471. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2006.06.008Enea, M., & Piazza, T. (2004). Project Selection by Constrained Fuzzy AHP. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 3(1), 39-62. doi:10.1023/b:fodm.0000013071.63614.3dChu, T.-C., & Tsao, C.-T. (2002). Ranking fuzzy numbers with an area between the centroid point and original point. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 43(1-2), 111-117. doi:10.1016/s0898-1221(01)00277-

Life Cycle Cost Assessment of Preventive Strategies Applied to Prestressed Concrete Bridges Exposed to Chlorides

[EN] This paper applies Life Cycle Assessment methodology to aid in the decision making to select the preventive measure against chloride corrosion in concrete structures that works best for the socio-economic context of the structure. The assumed model combines the concepts of Life Cycle Cost Analysis and Social Life Cycle Analysis to assess the impacts on users derived from the maintenance activities associated with each alternative analyzed in terms of economic costs. The model has been applied to a prestressed concrete bridge to obtain a preventive measure that can reduce the total costs incurred over the period of analysis by up to 58.5% compared to the cost of the current solution.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, along with FEDER funding (Project: BIA2017-85098-R).Navarro, IJ.; Yepes, V.; Martí Albiñana, JV. (2018). Life Cycle Cost Assessment of Preventive Strategies Applied to Prestressed Concrete Bridges Exposed to Chlorides. Sustainability. 10(3):845-1-845-16. doi:10.3390/su10030845S845-1845-1610

Social life cycle assessment of concrete bridge decks exposed to aggressive environments

[EN] Sustainable design of structures includes environmental and economic aspects; social aspects throughout the life cycle of the structure, however, are not always adequately assessed. This study evaluates the social contribution of a concrete bridge deck. The social performance of the different design alternatives is estimated taking into account the impacts derived from both the construction and the maintenance phases of the infrastructure under conditions of uncertainty. Uncertain inputs related to social context are treated through Beta-PERT distributions. Maintenance needs for the different materials are estimated by means of a reliability based durability evaluation. Results show that social impacts resulting from the service life of bridges are not to be neglected in sustainability assessments of such structures. Designs that minimize maintenance operations throughout the service life, such as using stainless steel rebars or silica fume containing concretes, are socially preferable to conventional designs. The results can complement economic and environmental sustainability assessments of bridge structures.The authors acknowledge the financial support of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, along with FEDER funding (Project: BIA2017-85098-R).Navarro, IJ.; Yepes, V.; Martí Albiñana, JV. (2018). Social life cycle assessment of concrete bridge decks exposed to aggressive environments. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 72:50-63. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2018.05.003S50637